4.8 Article

Insulin degludec, an ultra-longacting basal insulin, versus insulin glargine in basal-bolus treatment with mealtime insulin aspart in type 1 diabetes (BEGIN Basal-Bolus Type 1): a phase 3, randomised, open-label, treat-to-target non-inferiority trial

期刊

LANCET
卷 379, 期 9825, 页码 1489-1497

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60204-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. Novo Nordisk
  2. Novo Nordisk (Bagsvaerd, Denmark)
  3. Eli Lilly
  4. Sanofi
  5. University of Colorado for clinical research
  6. Merck
  7. Cebix
  8. MannKind
  9. Medtronic MiniMed
  10. DexCom
  11. Amylin Pharmaceutical
  12. Andromeda
  13. Bayhill Therapeutics
  14. Biodel
  15. Boehringer Ingelheim
  16. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  17. Catabasis
  18. Diartis
  19. Elcelyx
  20. Exsulin
  21. GI Dynamics
  22. Halozyme
  23. Hoffman-La Roche
  24. Johnson and Johnson
  25. Lexicon
  26. LipoScience
  27. Metabolon
  28. Novan
  29. Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals
  30. Osiris Therapeutics
  31. Orexigen
  32. Pfizer
  33. Tolerex
  34. Transition Therapeutics
  35. TransPharma
  36. Amylin
  37. AstraZeneca
  38. Takeda
  39. Servier
  40. Merck Serono
  41. Dohme
  42. GlaxoSmithKline
  43. Merck Sharp

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Intensive basal-bolus insulin therapy has been shown to improve glycaemic control and reduce the risk of long-term complications that are associated with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Insulin degludec is a new, ultra-longacting basal insulin. We therefore compared the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec and insulin glargine, both administered once daily with mealtime insulin aspart, in basal-bolus therapy for type 1 diabetes. Methods In an open-label, treat-to-target, non-inferiority trial, undertaken at 79 sites (hospitals and centres) in six countries, adults (aged >= 18 years) with type 1 diabetes (glycated haemoglobin [HbA(1c)] <= 10% [86 mmol/mol]), who had been treated with basal-bolus insulin for at least 1 year, were randomly assigned in a 3:1 ratio, with a computer-generated blocked allocation sequence, to insulin degludec or insulin glargine without stratification by use of a central interactive response system. The primary outcome was non-inferiority of degludec to glargine, assessed as a reduction in HbA(1c) after 52 weeks, with the intention-to-treat analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00982228. Findings Of 629 participants, 472 were randomly assigned to insulin degludec and 157 to insulin glargine; all were analysed in their respective treatment groups. At 1 year, HbA(1c) had fallen by 0.40% points (SE 0.03) and 0.39% points (0.07), respectively, with insulin degludec and insulin glargine (estimated treatment difference -0.01% points [95% CI -0.14 to 0.11]; p<0.0001 for non-inferiority testing) and 188 (40%) and 67 (43%) participants achieved a target HbA(1c) of less than 7% (<53 mmol/mol). Rates of overall confirmed hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose <3.1 mmol/L or severe) were similar in the insulin degludec and insulin glargine groups (42.54 vs 40.18 episodes per patient-year of exposure; estimated rate ratio [degludec to glargine] 1.07 [0.89 to 1.28]; p=0.48). The rate of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was 25% lower with degludec than with glargine (4.41 vs 5.86 episodes per patient-year of exposure; 0.75 [0.59 to 0.96]; p=0.021). Overall serious adverse event rates (14 vs 16 events per 100 patient-years of exposure) were similar for the insulin degludec and insulin glargine groups. Interpretation Insulin degludec might be a useful basal insulin for patients with type 1 diabetes because it provides effective glycaemic control while lowering the risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia, which is a major limitation of insulin therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据